Illegal Immigrants

[Labrocca]

Currently this is a bigger and bigger discussion. Anyone wishing to chime in their opinions here please do so.

My personal belief is that we need to decriminalize the immigrants and start taxing them. I support the Presidents idea of giving them work visas. We need to know who is coming over the border. We already know we can't stop them from coming.

DEBATE!

[Deacon]

I actually agree, but the problem I have is 40 yrs ago this was a monolingual country with English, recently we have been declared as bilingual: English and Esponal, I am decent in my Spanish skills, but do not want that language over running our society

En Esponal
Convengo realmente, pero el problema que tengo es hace 40 años esto era un paÃ*s monolingüe con inglés, nos han declarado recientemente como bilingües: Inglés y Esponal, soy decente en mis habilidades españolas, pero no deseo esa lengua sobre el funcionamiento de nuestra sociedad

[Labrocca]

This country has yet to declare a 'national language'. One day it may be come a big issue though.

[Deacon]

Yes, I agree, but my teachers map which she just ogt says we are a bilingual country.


En Esponal:
SÃ*, convengo, pero mi mapa de los profesores que ella apenas ogt diga somos un paÃ*s bilingüe.

[Labrocca]

We are a bilingual country. In Las Vegas every package in every store pretty much has English/Spanish. Sort of like how Canada has everything in English/French.

[FucangLong]

Our country is just so diverse its impossible to choose one single language and call it ours.

[Deacon]

That is true.... I agree, come to think of it I know a few people who's FL is Polish,Spanish, Russian, etc

[FucangLong]

I think we shouldn't be awarding those who come over the border on a regular basis with visas, but since we can't stop them anyways, we should give some visas for immigrants. However, people on the border will be outraged with this. Mexican workers work for less, and american citizens will have to compete with these wages for jobs. Would your rather higher a Mexican for minimum wage or an American for $10 an hour?

[Mayberry]

Wow, you guys have short attention spans. No discussion since 3/30. Has this become a non-issue already?

[Old Corps Gunny]

I believe the correct word is "Espanol" with a tilde over the n, not Esponal, no es verdad?

[Buck Laser]

I believe the correct word is "Espanol" with a tilde over the n, not Esponal, no es verdad?

Well, I speak un piquote esponal, pore no mos!

[DHard3006]

If Mexico is so dang spiffy why are all of these Illegal Mexicans coming to America?

The problem is the illegal entry into America, not immigration. The leftist aka progressives want to make it a racial issue, when it is just a criminal issue.

As for labor like any scab they drive down wages for the working people of America.

[Nathan Brazil]

Currently this is a bigger and bigger discussion.Â*Â*Anyone wishing to chime in their opinions here please do so.

My personal belief is that we need to decriminalize the immigrants and start taxing them.Â*Â*I support the Presidents idea of giving them work visas.Â*Â*We need to know who is coming over the border.Â*Â*We already know we can't stop them from coming.Â*Â*

DEBATE!


We "know" that? How can we know that we can't stop them from coming when we have yet to try anything to stop them?

Want to stop them? End welfare able-bodied Americans, enforce laws controlling the hiring of immigrants. Put the employers in jail, fine them, and put them out of business if they hire invaders.

Overnight, the number of employers hiring invaders will drop to zero. In the mean time, our own native population of parasites can discover the joys of unskilled labor and build some character.

If the domestic workforce won't work for the wages offered, then the work doesn't get done, and the workforce starves. Eventually a free market balance will be struck. That's called "freedom".

But there's no point in surrendering to Mexico before the battle's begun. What are we, a nation of weenies?

[Mayberry]

What are we, a nation of weenies? Unfortunately, yes. The liberal media has gained such control over public opinion that we've lost all common sense it seems. The pure fact of the matter is, that illegal immigrants put a huge strain on our economy, and cost taxpayers hundreds of millions, if not billions of dollars every year. They take away jobs from Americans, and drive wages down. For instance, the average hourly wage in Corpus Christi, Texas, where I live, is $17.50 per hour. link (http://www.city-data.com/city/Corpus-Christi-Texas.html) I can't find any hard numbers (are there any possible?), but the local news pegs the illegal population here at around 30,000. Our legal population is 277,454. In contrast, Raleigh, NC (pop.276,093) has an average hourly income of $22.40. link (http://www.city-data.com/city/Raleigh-North-Carolina.html) Again, I can't find any real numbers, but one would have to suppose that Corpus Christi's proximity to Mexico would have to suggest a much larger illegal alien population. Also, Corpus Christi's hourly wage is skewed by the large number of high paying refinery jobs as opposed to Raleigh's more conventional economy. Granted, these are only two examples, but it stands to reason that the effects are similar in other areas with a high concentration of illegal aliens.
It may not sit well with the touchy-feely types, but illegal immigration needs to stop. We can't afford it.

[Athena]

How about looking at this question in another way? When a man and a woman plan a family they look at their resources and consider the benefits and challenges of adding another child to the family. Right now our economic need for growth, and therefore, our city planning is insane!
We can continue this unplanned exponnential growth indefinitely.

Right now Mexico is sinking because they are extracting ground water much faster than it can be replaced. That means, its water supply is being exhausted at the same time its population is growing exponnentially. Mexico is on a collision course with disaster, and the ramifications to north and south American will be drastic. We would be foolish to ignor this.

On the other hand, we are on the same collision course with disaster. In Oregon farmers and fishermen have been a terrible fight over the water that both need. We are destroying our fishing industry with bad decisions.

How many immigrants (babies) can we add to our common wealth (family) without bringing us all to disaster? I am having a running arguement about how to provide the jobs for all the people needing them, when our populations are growing, our resources are dimished, technology and out sourcing are reducing the need for laborors. We are not thinking things through well, and therefore are not basing our decisions on reason. We are reacting emotionally to immigrants, not rationally. Please, we must get down to rational reasons for what we do, and we must look at the much bigger picture and distant future, if we are to have one.

[Mayberry]

we must look at the much bigger picture and distant future, if we are to have one. Couldn't have said it better myself. Rampant, uncontrolled illegal immigration will have a devastating effect on our country and economy. There aren't enough jobs, nor will there ever be. Welfare is definitely not a solution, but will be the cause of our demise. Imagine if the 11 million or more illegals in this country were gone, our unemployment rate would be zero.

[Athena]

Early discrimination against the Chinese was based in part on their willingness to work for low wages, reducing the wage employers were willing to pay. This is without doubt the exploitation of people. The power has shifted from the mass who can be exploited to those who gladly exploit them.

I worked in the fields with my children. Unlike other nations, our schools close in the summer, because children once worked in the fields. We have restricted their work in the field because of the dangerous chemicals used in growing our foods, and it is okay to subject an adult to them? It is a good thing to leave children with nothing to do all summer unless their families can afford entertainments? How about having a world class of pampered people? Might this lead to some human problems? Might we be nuturing immorality?

[Athena]

If the domestic workforce won't work for the wages offered, then the work doesn't get done, and the workforce starves. Eventually a free market balance will be struck. That's called "freedom".

We look down our noses at the low wage laborors, and have made many laws that hurt these people. Laws that protect the affluenct and a standard of living low wage workers can not achieve. Things were not always this way, but the technology developed around WWII made the US very affluent and now they think with the mentality of affluence and many no longer identify with the low wage worker. I think there is a kind of immorality built into this. I know I do not like the laws that hinder the low income people's ability to have decent lives. This is not liberty and freedom.

[Mayberry]

Might we be nuturing immorality? Of course we are! It's on TV every day, for all those kids at home for the summer to see. We tell them it's o.k. to be promiscuous, to be homosexual, to have children out of wedlock, that nothing they do is their fault (it's some "chemical imbalance" that made me do it, or because I had a lousy childhood). We keep feeding our kids this crap, and it's no wonder they're screwed up. Personally, I limit my kid's TV watching pretty much to Nickelodeon and the Disney Channel, and even the Disney Channel has some shows with questionable content. If I don't like it, I make them change the channel.

[Nathan Brazil]

If the domestic workforce won't work for the wages offered, then the work doesn't get done, and the workforce starves. Eventually a free market balance will be struck. That's called "freedom".

We look down our noses at the low wage laborors, and have made many laws that hurt these people.Â*Â*Laws that protect the affluenct and a standard of living low wage workers can not achieve.Â*Â*Things were not always this way, but the technology developed around WWII made the US very affluent and now they think with the mentality of affluence and many no longer identify with the low wage worker.Â*Â*I think there is a kind of immorality built into this.Â*Â*I know I do not like the laws that hinder the low income people's ability to have decent lives.Â*Â*This is not liberty and freedom.Â*Â*


What laws hinder the poor from having decent lives? Do you mean the minimum wage laws that boost prices and limit the employment of legal residents and citizens, thereby preventing many from getting job experices vital to moving up the socio-economic ladder?

Come up with specific examples of what you mean.

[Athena]

If the domestic workforce won't work for the wages offered, then the work doesn't get done, and the workforce starves. Eventually a free market balance will be struck. That's called "freedom".

We look down our noses at the low wage laborors, and have made many laws that hurt these people.Â*Â*Laws that protect the affluenct and a standard of living low wage workers can not achieve.Â*Â*Things were not always this way, but the technology developed around WWII made the US very affluent and now they think with the mentality of affluence and many no longer identify with the low wage worker.Â*Â*I think there is a kind of immorality built into this.Â*Â*I know I do not like the laws that hinder the low income people's ability to have decent lives.Â*Â*This is not liberty and freedom.Â*Â*


What laws hinder the poor from having decent lives?Â*Â*Do youÂ*Â*mean the minimum wage laws that boost prices and limit the employment of legal residents and citizens, thereby preventing many from getting job experices vital to moving up the socio-economic ladder?

Come up with specific examples of what you mean.


Minium wage laws have nothing to do with preventing anyone from getting a job. In Oregon, our minium wage has been over $7.00 for a long time, and over the federal $5.?? for a very long time, and it helps the economy, because it means people have more money to spend.

The laws I was thinking about are not the mimium wages any way, but housing laws. I became aware of housing laws that hurt the poor during the 1970 recession when I began researching such things. For example new mobil home parks could accept only new mobil homes by law. We had plenty of older mobil homes for all the people needing low cost housing, but no place to put them. This ruined the value of older mobil homes, and at the same prevented us from providing the housing we needed by using the housing we had. The law protected those who wanted land property values to go up, and hurt low income people.

Also, if people can not afford electricity, they can be evicted for no other reason than not having electricity. Something people didn't have for centuries, is now mandatory. This means people living from pay check to pay check are at increased of being evicted and this is a serious disruption to people's lives, which can lead problems with children staying in school and people keeping their jobs.

If people's cars smoke too much they can be fined. I understand the reasoning for this, but was one of those people with a smokey car and without the money to resolve the problem fast enough. Such things make life harder for low income people, and may be justice should reconsider their reality?

I remember when having auto insurance was a choice, and frankly I am opposed to taking people's driver's license because they don't have insurance and all the fines and increased fees these people face. This hurts low income people badly. People can insurance themselves against uninsured motorist and that is great for people who can afford it.
Sometimes being poor means taking risk we don't want to take, and I don't expect anyone who has not had this experience to accept this point of view. Without the experience, they have opinions, but those opinions are not based on what we gain through experience. Today we value being smart, but being smart without wisdom, is not a good thing.

[Nathan Brazil]

Minium wage laws have nothing to do with preventing anyone from getting a job.

Nonsense.Â*Â*Minimum wage laws are an articial step-increase in labor costs, typically the biggest overhead item of any business.


In Oregon, our minium wage has been over $7.00 for a long time, and over the federal $5.?? for a very long time, and it helps the economy, because it means people have more money to spend.

It means people have a little more to spend on things that have had their prices raised proportionately more to cover the added wage expenses.Â*Â*Net loss.

The laws I was thinking about are not the mimium wages any way, but housing laws.Â*Â*I became aware of housing laws that hurt the poor during the 1970 recession when I began researching such things.Â*Â*For example new mobil home parks could accept only new mobil homes by law.Â*Â*We had plenty of older mobil homes for all the people needing low cost housing, but no place to put them.Â*Â*This ruined the value of older mobil homes, and at the same prevented us from providing the housing we needed by using the housing we had.Â*Â*The law protected those who wanted land property values to go up, and hurt low income people.

Okay, that's one I'll accept.Â*Â*Improper government interference in the housing market, with the caveat that title transfer cannot happen if the structure, fixed or mobile, does not meet applicable state and/or federal safety codes.

Also, if people can not afford electricity, they can be evicted for no other reason than not having electricity.Â*Â*Something people didn't have for centuries, is now mandatory.Â*Â*This means people living from pay check to pay check are at increased of being evicted and this is a serious disruption to people's lives, which can lead problems with children staying in school and people keeping their jobs.

As far as I know, people that legitimately cannot afford electricity are subsidized by the state and the utilities to cover the expense, and everyone else is taxed to make up the difference.

Also, of course a landlord can evict someone that isn't paying for electrical service, chances are real good the occupant is doing something to substitute for that lack that modern buildings aren't designed for.Â*Â*Candles or oil lamps for light?Â*Â*Fire hazard.

If people's cars smoke too much they can be fined.Â*Â*I understand the reasoning for this, but was one of those people with a smokey car and without the money to resolve the problem fast enough.Â*Â*Such things make life harder for low income people, and may be justice should reconsider their reality?

Smoking's bad for your health...more importantly, it's bad for my health when I'm driving behind you, plus what else is wrong with that car that hasn't been fixed?Â*Â*This is a borderline area, but in my opinion, at least here in AQMD-Land of southern California, smog laws are nothing more than revenue generators for gas stations and governments.

I remember when having auto insurance was a choice, and frankly I am opposed to taking people's driver's license because they don't have insurance and all the fines and increased fees these people face.

No, they shouldn't take the driver's license, they should impound the vehicle that's not insured.Â*Â*And no, it shouldn't be a choice becuase the purpose of insurance is to protect other poor people who don't have good health coverage or good insurance on their own cars that get wrecked by the a-holes who won't buy insurance.

Impound the car, and fine the driver $500, too.

This hurts low income people badly.Â*Â*People can insurance themselves against uninsured motorist and that is great for people who can afford it.

There's no reason why someone should have to pay more insurance to subsidize the risks involved with people who won't buy insurance.Â*Â*If they can't afford the insurance, they can't afford the car.Â*Â*Tell 'em to take the bus, or figure out why God gave'em feet.

[Athena]

"As far as I know, people that legitimately cannot afford electricity are subsidized by the state and the utilities to cover the expense, and everyone else is taxed to make up the difference".

Not in Oregon.Â*Â*I never heard of such a thing, except the charity that some people get if they ask for it before it is all gone.Â* It seems the effort to help people pay electric bills after they get a disconnect notice, has increased, and the distribution of charitable food boxes has improved.Â*Â*Our truly low income housing situation has imporved a lot!Â*Â*St. Vincent de Paul has the most low income housing in our area, but there are other providers as well.Â*Â*This is a huge improvement from 30 years ago, when Reagan denied we had a homeless problem.Â*Â*Â*

[Athena]

"There's no reason why someone should have to pay more insurance to subsidize the risks involved with people who won't buy insurance. If they can't afford the insurance, they can't afford the car. Tell 'em to take the bus, or figure out why God gave'em feet".

Right, like the whole world has adequate bus service. Tocqueville discribed people like you very well, when he wrote of our future in 1835.
Personally I object strongly to paying for your protection. If I had a well and you were dying of thrist, I am not sure I would share water with you. Why should pay insure to protect you?

[Nathan Brazil]

Right, like the whole world has adequate bus service.Â*Â*Tocqueville discribed people like you very well, when he wrote of our future in 1835.

You mean he wrote about people who don't want to be the slaves of the poor and useless? Amazing man, that de Toqueville.

What part about freedom do you not understand?


Personally I object strongly to paying for your protection.

You're not. I carry my own insurance.

It's not a question of sharing, sharing requires consent from both parties. What you're demanding in terms of auto-insurance is coercion, which is the antithesis of free trade.

And yet you babble on and on about how "democracy" is about freedom as you espouse programs that destroy freedom by their very nature.

[Anti-Racism]

We already know we can't stop them from coming.

We don't need to. Take away jobs and welfare, and they won't be here. Immigration is bad for both America and Mexico.

[Nitrus]

It is not bad, it is actually quite good. There just needs to be more control over the situation, stricter measures applied to the borders of the country.

And I have always seen America as an English speaking country, and I believe that this will always be the "main" language simply because it is used practically worldwide as a second language.

[DHard3006]

It is not bad, it is actually quite good. There just needs to be more control over the situation, stricter measures applied to the borders of the country.
What part of a free country do you not understand? Have you ever heard of the berlin wall? It did not stop people from doing what they wanted to do.

Why is it people like you chant to protect our freedom we must enforce stricter security measures. All we need to do is punish the people that hire illegal aliens and the illegal aliens that enter this country illegally.

Employers from both political parties like illegal aliens because they can hire and work them for lower wages.

Consumers from both political parties like illegal aliens because they get to purchase cheap consumer goods.

[Anti-Racism]

All we need to do is punish the people that hire illegal aliens and the illegal aliens that enter this country illegally.


Yep, make it expensive, and it'll quit.

[bobbylien]

All we need to do is punish the people that hire illegal aliens and the illegal aliens that enter this country illegally.

And how exactly will we figure out which businesses hire illegals? Thats easy to say but it would be really tough to do, businesses won't report that they are hiring illegals.

[Nathan Brazil]

And how exactly will we figure out which businesses hire illegals? Thats easy to say but it would be really tough to do, businesses won't report that they are hiring illegals.


It's easy.Â*Â*Correlate tax returns against FICA payments against Socialist Security numbers, do a computer check against sales versus income versus payroll expenses.Â*Â*The data's there to find who's got the Mexicans on the payroll, even if they're not on the payroll.

Once some are caught, make examples out of them.Â*Â*Put the President of Tyson Chicken in jail, fine the company ten thousand dollars for each offense, the first time around.Â*Â*The second time, fine them a hundred grand, and put the board of directors in the slammer.

Won't be long before employers figure out who not to hire.

[Anti-Racism]

I agree. Also, let employers hire anyone they want... end anti-discrimination legislation that's costing us billions in lawsuits.